Ask Attorney Bernie: 'Court rulings are to be respected'

By Bernard J. Rabik, For The Times

Friday

Nov 30, 2018 at 6:00 AM

Question: President Trump recently ripped the court as “a complete and total disaster.” He called it a “thorn in our side.” A judge who “knows nothing about it’” made a “ridiculous ruling” against Trump’s immigrant asylum crackdown. Have these remarks of Trump undermined our Rule of Law?

Answer: I’m reminded of what my law school professor often and emphatically told me:

“Although in the future you may disagree with a judge’s ruling, the Rule of Law demands that judges be respected. Otherwise, we become less a democracy. The Rule of Law suffers.”

After the president complained that an “Obama judge” from the Ninth Circuit had ruled against his administration’s asylum policy, Chief Justice Roberts took a highly unusual step and spoke out against the president's comments, declaring that we do not have "Obama judges" or "Trump judges,” and an “independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

The president responded: “Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have Obama judges.”

Many presidents have taken issue with judicial decisions on their merits, including Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Barack Obama. But Trump’s language was different in its scorn and sheer demagoguery. He failed to challenge the court’s legal reasoning, thus showing no respect for the court’s ruling.

“Disagreeing with a court’s decision is everyone’s right, but when government officials question a court’s motives, mock its legitimacy or threaten retaliation due to an unfavorable ruling, they intend to erode the court’s standing and hinder the courts from performing their constitutional duties.” The Rule of Law is diminished.

Constitution

While the United States does not have a single document called “The Constitution” with an uppercase "T" and "C," the American system also presumes non-constitutional values and customs that are just as vital, if not more vital to the health of our democracy.

Among these indispensable customs are decorum and civility in public argument, which largely distinguish a democracy from a mere mob.

Americans have not always been civil or decorous with one another, of course; but, until recently this was the minimal expectation.

The public discourse has devolved to such an extent that the value of civility itself is now questioned as often as its conventions are routinely violated. “You talk about somebody that’s a loser,” President Trump said about a journalist.

Moral duty

We have a moral duty to respect court rulings. We can’t afford to treat court rulings with scorn. The Rule of Law demands that.

Let me finish

President Trump is the only one who happens to be President of the United States and, as such, has a greater duty than most to deploy his rhetoric with prudence, decorum and moral clarity, an extra-constitutional but nonetheless essential duty of his office.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was spot-on when he wrote: “The Presidency is not merely an administrative office. That’s the least of it. It is more than an engineering job, efficient or inefficient. It is pre-eminently a place of moral leadership.”